Psychotherapy & Spirituality

[Dharmavidya]

Open publication - Free publishing - More spirituality

[Ben Ross]

I find so much clarified for me in this essay - the distinction between focusing on spirit and focusing on soul is so refreshing, and opens up such a vista in terms of what is missed in psychotherapy through a secularized sensibility directed at individual realization.

A reflection arises: In the Contemplative Psychotherapy program at Naropa University (which I'm a graduate of) there was a large emphasis placed on the importance of studies showing that all therapeutic approaches tested as being equally effective in terms of outcome, when the therapeutic relationship was rated as being generally empathic and attuned. This was pointed to as evidence that relationship trumped everything else. The viewpoint of relationship at Naropa was based, however (as I realize it now) on essentially a Rogerian perspective of creating conditions for the soul (or "Brilliant Sanity" in the terminology of Naropa) to emerge. I'm planning on finding out more about relationship in therapy from an Other-power perspective, but what about the hypothesis that any therapeutic approach is only as good as the empathy and attunement that emerge? And then what do I mean by "good"? I guess maybe that's the rub - what sort of outcome we're looking for? Glad to be able to be part of this discussion, thank you Dharmavidya for this paper!

Namo Amida Bu

[Dharmavidya]

Thanks Ben. In 'The Necessary Condition is Love' in Beyond Carl Rogers I argue that the importance of empathy lies less in a direct effect upon the client as it's object and more in the fact that the client learns to be empathic by being in the presence of the therapist. If this is correct then the therapeutic element is not so much to do with 'inner growth' as with 'quality of outer engagement'. Sanity then means a cleaner encounter with what is other. I suggest that one can describe this in terms of 'inner' change, but that to do so is unnecessarily long-winded. In this model, the relationship with the therapist is simply a catalyst - a step on the way to improved relations with others. Caroline and I have developed the theory of this much further in our forthcoming books:
Caroline: Listening to the Other - May 2009; &
Other Centred Therapy - October 2009;
myself: Love and Its Disappointment: The meaning of life, therapy and art - August 2009

[caroline brazier]

Ben Ross said:

In the Contemplative Psychotherapy program at Naropa University (which I'm a graduate of) there was a large emphasis placed on the importance of studies showing that all therapeutic approaches tested as being equally effective in terms of outcome, when the therapeutic relationship was rated as being generally empathic and attuned. This was pointed to as evidence that relationship trumped everything else. The viewpoint of relationship at Naropa was based, however (as I realize it now) on essentially a Rogerian perspective of creating conditions for the soul (or "Brilliant Sanity" in the terminology of Naropa) to emerge.

Hi Ben,

This is very interesting. We would also see relationship as very important to mental health. There's not space here to go into all the aspects of this topic, but I have written about it extensively in Other-Centred Therapy which comes out in October. Specifically, though, we would equate a Buddhist approach with being other-centred. Relationship with what is other works because it puts us in touch with what is not self. The better we relate and empathise, the less we are embedded in our self-world which is basically our (defensive) rigidity. Of course much of what we think is other is really just projections of self - the world viewed through the filter of our expectations and interpretations. Encounter brings us to relate better if it teaches us to empathise. David wrote about the client's need to empathise in his 1993 paper The Necessary Condition is Love in Beyond Carl Rogers (Constable Robinson)

Other-centred methods go beyond the Rogerian theory though in encouraging not only relationship between therapist and client (which is still, nevertheless, one important layer of encounter with 'other'). They take the client into a shared investigation of the world of objects which they inhabit - both relationships with significant others and experience of the environmental objects, including thw natural world. Through an investigative relationship, the client relates both to the therapist, his fellow traveller, and his 'others', naturally exploring and shedding the layers of conditioned thought as he does so.